ILCS » Chapter 720 · Act 5
Illinois Compiled Statutes

720 ILCS 5/47-5 (2026)

Public nuisance

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section IL-ILGAilga.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(720 ILCS 5/47-5)
    Sec. 47-5. Public nuisance. It is a public nuisance:
    (1) To cause or allow the carcass of an animal or offal, filth, or a noisome substance to be collected, deposited, or to remain in any place to the prejudice of others.
    (2) To throw or deposit offal or other offensive matter or the carcass of a dead animal in a water course, lake, pond, spring, well, or common sewer, street, or public highway.
    (3) To corrupt or render unwholesome or impure the water of a spring, river, stream, pond, or lake to the injury or prejudice of others.
    (4) To obstruct or impede, without legal authority, the passage of a navigable river or waters.
    (5) To obstruct or encroach upon public highways, private ways, streets, alleys, commons, landing places, and ways to burying places.
    (6) To carry on the business of manufacturing gunpowder, nitroglycerine, or other highly explosive substances, or mixing or grinding the materials for those substances, in a building within 20 rods of a valuable building erected at the time the business is commenced.
    (7) To establish powder magazines near incorporated towns, at a point different from that appointed according to law by the corporate authorities of the town, or within 50 rods of an occupied dwelling house.
    (8) To erect, continue, or use a building or other place for the exercise of a trade, employment, or manufacture that, by occasioning noxious exhalations, offensive smells, or otherwise, is offensive or dangerous to the health of individuals or of the public.
    (9) To advertise wares or occupation by painting notices of the wares or occupation on or affixing them to fences or other private property, or on rocks or other natural objects, without the consent of the owner, or if in the highway or other public place, without permission of the proper authorities.
    (10) To permit a well drilled for oil, gas, salt water disposal, or any other purpose in connection with the production of oil and gas to remain unplugged after the well is no longer used for the purpose for which it was drilled.
    (11) To construct or operate a salt water pit or oil field refuse pit, commonly called a "burn out pit", so that salt water, brine, or oil field refuse or other waste liquids may escape from the pit in a manner except by the evaporation of the salt water or brine or by the burning of the oil field waste or refuse.
    (12) To permit concrete bases, discarded machinery, and materials to remain around an oil or gas well, or to fail to fill holes, cellars, slush pits, and other excavations made in connection with the well or to restore the surface of the lands surrounding the well to its condition before the drilling of the well, upon abandonment of the oil or gas well.
    (13) To permit salt water, oil, gas, or other wastes from a well drilled for oil, gas, or exploratory purposes to escape to the surface, or into a mine or coal seam, or into an underground fresh water supply, or from one underground stratum to another.
    (14) To harass, intimidate, or threaten a person who is about to sell or lease or has sold or leased a residence or other real property or is about to buy or lease or has bought or leased a residence or other real property, when the harassment, intimidation, or threat relates to a person's attempt to sell, buy, or lease a residence, or other real property, or refers to a person's sale, purchase, or lease of a residence or other real property.
    (15) To store, dump, or permit the accumulation of debris, refuse, garbage, trash, tires, buckets, cans, wheelbarrows, garbage cans, or other containers in a manner that may harbor mosquitoes, flies, insects, rodents, nuisance birds, or other animal pests that are offensive, injurious, or dangerous to the health of individuals or the public.
    (16) To create a condition, through the improper maintenance of a swimming pool or wading pool, or by causing an action that alters the condition of a natural body of water, so that it harbors mosquitoes, flies, or other animal pests that are offensive, injurious, or dangerous to the health of individuals or the public.
    (17) To operate a tanning facility without a valid permit under the Tanning Facility Permit Act.
    Nothing in this Section shall be construed to prevent the corporate authorities of a city, village, or incorporated town, or the county board of a county, from declaring what are nuisances and abating them within their limits. Counties have that authority only outside the corporate limits of a city, village, or incorporated town.
(Source: P.A. 89-234, eff. 1-1-96.)

    
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 9 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1998–2025 · leading case: City of Chicago v. Beretta U.S.A. Corp., 821 N.E.2d 1099 (Ill. 2004).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
City of Chicago v. Beretta U.S.A. Corp., 821 N.E.2d 1099 (Ill. 2004). · cites it 2× “In Illinois, cities and counties are free to impose gun regulations within certain limits (see 720 ILCS 5/47-5 (West 2002)). Nevertheless, we agree with defendants that the Florida court's observation is worthy of consideration.”
Donaldson v. Cent. Illinois Pub. Serv. Co., 767 N.E.2d 314 (Ill. 2002). · cites it 2× “We conclude, therefore, that the trial court did not err by denying CIPS's motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict.”
First Springfield Bank & Trust v. Galman, 720 N.E.2d 1068 (Ill. 1999). “In addition, First Springfield sued Dobson and ADM for violating section 5 of the Public Nuisance Act, which makes it a public nuisance "[t]o obstruct or encroach upon public highways.”
Jamison v. City of Zion, 834 N.E.2d 499 (Ill. App. Ct. 2005). · cites it 2× “We also agree with the city that plaintiff cannot avail himself of the public *502 nuisance statute, which appears in the Criminal Code of 1961 (720 ILCS 5/47-5 (West 2002)), because the State's Attorney, not the city, has the authority to prosecute crimes.”
First Springfield Bank & Trust v. Galman, 702 N.E.2d 1002 (Ill. App. Ct. 1998). · cites it 2× “26(5) (now 720 ILCS 5/47-5(5) (West 1996))). The jury returned a verdict in favor of Philippart, allocating comparative fault between her, Galman, and ADM and Dobson.”
VODAK v. City of Chicago, 624 F. Supp. 2d 933 (N.D. Ill. 2009). · cites it 2× “disturb another and promote a breach of the peace or as to provoke or aid in making a breach of the peace; 3) hindering or disrupting traffic on the streets of downtown Chicago in violation of Section 9-80-180 of the municipal code; 4) committing state public nuisance violations…”
Milan v. Forest Preserve Dist. of Cook Cnty., 2025 IL App (1st) 241058 (Ill. App. Ct. 2025). “¶ 22 Illinois has a public nuisance statute (720 ILCS 5/47-5 (West 2022)), which neither defines nor limits common law actions and only lists the 17 specific activities that have already been - 11 - 1-24-1058 recognized as public nuisances.”
First Springfield Bank & Trust v. Galman (Ill. App. Ct. 1998). · cites it 2× “26(5) (now 720 ILCS 5/47-5(5) (West 1996))). The jury re­turned a verdict in favor of Philippart, allo­cat­ing com­ parative fault between her, Galman, and ADM and Dobson.”
Test Drilling Serv. Co. v. Hanor Co., 322 F. Supp. 2d 957 (C.D. Ill. 2003). “720 ILCS 5/47-5 (1), (2), (3), and (10) are under the Public Nuisance section of the Illinois Criminal Code which makes it a public nuisance to allow filth or offensive material to be deposited to the prejudice of others, to be deposited in water sources, and to allow a well…”
— 720 ILCS 5/47-5(5) — 4 cases
First Springfield Bank & Trust v. Galman, 720 N.E.2d 1068 (Ill. 1999). “In addition, First Springfield sued Dobson and ADM for violating section 5 of the Public Nuisance Act, which makes it a public nuisance "[t]o obstruct or encroach upon public highways.”
First Springfield Bank & Trust v. Galman, 702 N.E.2d 1002 (Ill. App. Ct. 1998). “26(5) (now 720 ILCS 5/47-5(5) (West 1996))). The jury returned a verdict in favor of Philippart, allocating comparative fault between her, Galman, and ADM and Dobson.”
VODAK v. City of Chicago, 624 F. Supp. 2d 933 (N.D. Ill. 2009). “disturb another and promote a breach of the peace or as to provoke or aid in making a breach of the peace; 3) hindering or disrupting traffic on the streets of downtown Chicago in violation of Section 9-80-180 of the municipal code; 4) committing state public nuisance violations…”
First Springfield Bank & Trust v. Galman (Ill. App. Ct. 1998). “26(5) (now 720 ILCS 5/47-5(5) (West 1996))). The jury re­turned a verdict in favor of Philippart, allo­cat­ing com­ parative fault between her, Galman, and ADM and Dobson.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.